Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Universal Perfection
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 1 of 117 (63592)
10-31-2003 8:36 AM


Is it not true that the universe seems to be just right for the possibility and indeed fact of life?
If the universe was any smaller or bigger would Oxygen be a certainty?
What about the effects of gravity aswell? I have recently heard about this 'Theory Of Everything'. The anti gravity force seems to be making the universe grow bigger , this opened a can of worms in the wiz box and so I am interested in learning more about space and time. (scientifically helpless)! With grade F confirmation.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2003 9:00 AM mike the wiz has not replied
 Message 12 by TechnoCore, posted 10-31-2003 2:03 PM mike the wiz has replied
 Message 58 by compmage, posted 11-02-2003 2:07 PM mike the wiz has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 2 of 117 (63599)
10-31-2003 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by mike the wiz
10-31-2003 8:36 AM


mike the wiz writes:
quote:
Is it not true that the universe seems to be just right for the possibility and indeed fact of life?
No.
In fact, it seems exactly the opposite. Life is just right for the universe in which it finds itself.
How could it be any other way? The fundamental constants of the universe don't change. At the very least, we have never found any way they could ever be changed. Life, on the other hand, is constantly mutating and never remains consistent.
Therefore, which seems to be the more likely scenario:
The immutable object changed itself to match the protean or the protean object changed itself to match the immutable?
quote:
If the universe was any smaller or bigger would Oxygen be a certainty?
Who cares?
Who said life requires oxygen? If the universe were different, then we wouldn't be here. Instead, something else would be.
Why is the sky blue? Because if it were green we would ask, why is the sky green?
Are you really saying that the question, "Why is the sky blue?" came into being before the sky and thus the sky was deliberately made to be blue so that the question could be asked?
Or perhaps the sky is whatever color physics made it be and the people who came after the sky wondered about why the sky is the way it is.
quote:
I have recently heard about this 'Theory Of Everything'.
Why do I get the feeling you know nothing about it.
Quick question: What is the big thing about the Theory of Everything? That is, what is it trying to unify.
Hint: It has to do with fundamental forces.
quote:
The anti gravity force seems to be making the universe grow bigger , this opened a can of worms in the wiz box
It hasn't been nearly as problematic for physicists, though. They take it in stride, make the observations, and construct their theories to accomodate the new information. It hasn't resulted in anybody saying, "Well hell...the Big Bang couldn't have happened."
quote:
I am interested in learning more about space and time.
Why don't you do some research with an open mind for a change? Rather than go to your creationist sources, certain that the answer has to be a specific way, why not go to physicist sources and listen to what they have to say, even if it completely contradicts your preconceived notion of the way things ought to be?
------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 8:36 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:06 AM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 30 by DNAunion, posted 11-01-2003 1:51 AM Rrhain has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 3 of 117 (63601)
10-31-2003 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Rrhain
10-31-2003 9:00 AM


To be fair to Mike, most Physicists would agree that the universe does seem to be tuned for life. Most ways in which we might conceive of the universe being different would result in a universe in which no life at all was possible.
However, the question about whether these concievable universes are posible has yet to be answered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Rrhain, posted 10-31-2003 9:00 AM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 9:22 AM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 6 by JustinC, posted 10-31-2003 9:25 AM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 10 by Rei, posted 10-31-2003 1:32 PM Dr Jack has not replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 4 of 117 (63606)
10-31-2003 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Jack
10-31-2003 9:06 AM


Do you know anything about the gravitational consequences of an ubalanced life bowl?
Maybe if the stars dissapeared, it wouldn't matter for a few million years,- teach me

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:06 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:24 AM mike the wiz has replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 5 of 117 (63607)
10-31-2003 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by mike the wiz
10-31-2003 9:22 AM


What do you mean by a 'life bowl', or indeed an 'unbalanced life bowl'? I've never heard the term.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 9:22 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 9:36 AM Dr Jack has replied

JustinC
Member (Idle past 4843 days)
Posts: 624
From: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: 07-21-2003


Message 6 of 117 (63609)
10-31-2003 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Jack
10-31-2003 9:06 AM


quote:
To be fair to Mike, most Physicists would agree that the universe does seem to be tuned for life
Apparently, since life exists. Isn't it also tuned to produce giant gaseous planets, nebula, atoms, oceans, etc. (Sorry for poor examples, imagination doesn't work well in the morning)
Isn't that just like saying, "The universe it tuned in such a way to make everything that exists exist"? Seems like tautology, and I don't think any important point can be made from it.
JustinC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:06 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:43 AM JustinC has not replied
 Message 32 by DNAunion, posted 11-01-2003 2:03 AM JustinC has replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 7 of 117 (63612)
10-31-2003 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Dr Jack
10-31-2003 9:24 AM


Lol, I meant universe, I shouldn't attempt to Bradify my words.- don't be fooled into thinking I have a brain, - remember the 'F'!
I guess I am more interested in what kind of effects would not have made life possible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:24 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:47 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 8 of 117 (63615)
10-31-2003 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by JustinC
10-31-2003 9:25 AM


Isn't that just like saying, "The universe it tuned in such a way to make everything that exists exist"? Seems like tautology, and I don't think any important point can be made from it.
It's not a tautology, blow up any bit of dynamite and you'll get much the same exlosion, but swap the dynamite for jelly (jello to our American friends, I believe) and nothing much will happen. But whether it has any significance depends on why the universe is such that it is. Since we have no current explanation they can try the god of the gaps card.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by JustinC, posted 10-31-2003 9:25 AM JustinC has not replied

Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 9 of 117 (63617)
10-31-2003 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by mike the wiz
10-31-2003 9:36 AM


Mostly they're to do with the fundemental constants that 'control' the various forces that hold matter together. There's only a very narrow band in which matter will form, a narrower band still in which matter will be stable, a narrower band of gravitional force strength in which planets will form.
The trouble with this all is that we have no real reason to believe these constants are arbitary and could have different values. While our current physical knowledge doesn't explain them, future explanations may. In the same way Kepler's laws described planetary motion, and Newton's laws explained why they followed those paths.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 9:36 AM mike the wiz has not replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7012 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 10 of 117 (63663)
10-31-2003 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Dr Jack
10-31-2003 9:06 AM


quote:
To be fair to Mike, most Physicists would agree that the universe does seem to be tuned for life. Most ways in which we might conceive of the universe being different would result in a universe in which no life at all was possible.
Wrong. Most physicisits would argue that this universe is tuned for LAWKI (Life As We Know It), not life in general. Here's a good talkorigins FAQ about probability calculations of life given different laws of physics:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/cosmo.html
The author played around with physical constants of different universes as far as 10 orders of magnitude out, to see what he got for the size of atoms, the lifetime of stars, etc. In almost all universes, it would be around long enough for some sort of life, however strange, to evolve. For example:
This is a distribution for 100 random universes (changing proton & electron masses, and the strength of the electromagnetic and strong forces) were tweaked. In over half the universes, stars live over a billion years.
------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."
[This message has been edited by Rei, 10-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 10-31-2003 9:06 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by DNAunion, posted 11-01-2003 1:28 AM Rei has not replied
 Message 29 by DNAunion, posted 11-01-2003 1:33 AM Rei has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 11 of 117 (63665)
10-31-2003 1:43 PM


I have a real difficulty with the phrase "The universe is fine-tuned for life."I could accept the Earth is fine-tuned for life as that does make sense but when I look at the universe there is this enormous amount of space deadly in the extreme to any form of life as we know it and only this vanishlingly small planet of ours that life exists to our present knowledge.
Why would anyone except in a narrow view of things assume this phrase to be true?

TechnoCore
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 117 (63670)
10-31-2003 2:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by mike the wiz
10-31-2003 8:36 AM


Maybe you ask the wrong question, Mike.
I would rather ask:
Is it not true that life seems to be functioning perfectly right exactly here ?
Why do I ask this opposite, but quite similar question?
Because 99.999999999999999999% of this universe is not a good place for any life we know. Its 100% deadly.
It does seem that life is fitted to the surroundings, and not the other way around.
In fact, if you could change just one of the physical laws a tiny bit, nothing in this universe would look and interact as it does now. All sets of things, like stars, planets, beaches, ocean-waves, mountain-heights, molecules, composition of the atmospheres does look exactly like they do because they are at equilibrium between a set of forces acting upon them.
Changing one physical law a tiny fraction almost certaiable makes earth, or and the rest of the universe completly leathal to us, but it would not be any less functioning as a universe. You could pick any set of laws, and something would come out of it. All you do is change equilibriums between laws. Things like stars, galaxys and planets would all just form at a different scale, and look a bit different.
[This message has been edited by TechnoCore, 10-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 8:36 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 3:57 PM TechnoCore has replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 13 of 117 (63685)
10-31-2003 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by TechnoCore
10-31-2003 2:03 PM


'It does seem that life is fitted to the surroundings, and not the other way around.'
Well, why can't it be the other way around?
The fact is the universe is perfect FOR life on earth. If it's 99.9 whatever percent inhabitable, that would agree with my thoughts which are , that life on earth is probably the only life in the universe. If the universe was any different it would not be 'just right' which, as I see it CAN mean Creation , rather than an explosion which comes about by chance and somehow accidentally creates a perfect system. It just seems to fit nicely- and it does. 'It was very good'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by TechnoCore, posted 10-31-2003 2:03 PM TechnoCore has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Rei, posted 10-31-2003 4:19 PM mike the wiz has replied
 Message 20 by TechnoCore, posted 10-31-2003 5:02 PM mike the wiz has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7012 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 14 of 117 (63693)
10-31-2003 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by mike the wiz
10-31-2003 3:57 PM


You do realize that your argument is the equivalent of a child stating "If my parents had married other people, I never would have been born! That would be horrible, so I'm glad that they got married!". Yes, you would not have been born - but other people would have been born instead. And to those people, it would had been horrible if your parents had married the way they did in reality.
Whatever reality life forms develop in, they will be immeasurably thankful that the laws of the universe were precisely in the way that they were. They will be immeasurably thankful for whatever planet/planetoid that they were born on being precisely the way it was. Without these things, they'd be dead.
*Regardless Of What Universe It Is*
The issue is whether probability states that in other universes, life of any form (not LAWKI) is probable. What running the numbers shows, is that it looks like it is. There is ample time, and plenty of complexity in chemical reactions, to allow for it.
------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."
[This message has been edited by Rei, 10-31-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 3:57 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by mike the wiz, posted 10-31-2003 4:35 PM Rei has replied

mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4752
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 15 of 117 (63700)
10-31-2003 4:35 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Rei
10-31-2003 4:19 PM


'Whatever reality life forms develop in, they will be immeasurably thankful that the laws of the universe were precisely in the way that they were.'
I agree, I too am thankful for God's intelligence. The gift of life I am also grateful to him for, despite my parents.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Rei, posted 10-31-2003 4:19 PM Rei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by Rei, posted 10-31-2003 4:38 PM mike the wiz has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024